Debating weather to get 10-22 vs. 16-35 on the wide side or 70-300 DO vs. 70-200 IS in the tele end only shows that you can not make up your mind what is more important to YOU and sadly, none of us can help you with that. You seem to know that L lenses will give more quality but at the expense of heavier weight. Now, I may think that A is more important while another person will think otherwise. How does it help you? It doesn't. It's like asking which car to buy. Do you want an agile two-seater Honda S2000 or a people carrier minivan like the Renault Scenic? A 20 year old bachelor will get the former while a 40 year old with 3 kids will recommend the latter.

BTW, if I were to combine a 20D dream set it will probably consist of 10-22/3.5-4.5, 28/1.8, 85/1.8, Tamron 180/3.5 macro and 300/4 IS. See my point?

1. Purchase DXO Optics and the lens modules for the two EFS lenses and the DO, the software corrects any distortion and CA and most agree that whatever shortcomings the EFS lenses have, sharpness is not one of them.

2. Get yourself the 28mm f1.8 (*1.6=45mm); I find I use it extensively for indoor and low-light work - it's my snapshot lens of choice and I only switch to the 17-85 when I need it. If I had to choose only 1 lens for the 20D it would be a very tough choice between the 28 f1.8 and the 17-85.

And obviously if you're planning to get a 1-series body later on then go for #1.

I started another similar thread, but with a low budget. My EOS 20D dream would probably look like this:WA - EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USMStandard - 24-70 f 2.8 L - although I heard there are quite a large number of bad copies in stores, so I would be carefulTelephoto - definitely 70-200 f 2.8 (I would go with the normal version, although if you need IS, then get that one). I would probably add 300 f 4.0 which is around 1000 USD I think for longer reach, or, get a 1.4x teleconverter, which will make 98-280 f4.0 from your 70-200 f 2.8 - when used on 20D it is 160-448 f4.0.. not bad I think. I wouldn't go with the 70-300 DO - it's a small package, but it's terribly expensive - it's on par with 70-200 f2.8 L IS, which is around 1600 USD I think and it's f 4.5 - 5.6 - slow for such an expensive glass. I heard 100 f 2.8 macro is a real beauty.. very sharp and good, but if you're going with 20D, mabye you should consider the new EF-S 60 f 2.8 macro.

And yes, If you will consider buying EOS 1 series body, then EF-S is not a good path. Good luck with your choice

I'm quite new to this forum, just get into it accidentally from other sites link and found it is very useful. My question is pretty much the same old things, which lens to got with 20D.

I have a budget of around $4.5-6K to get into a completely new set of D-SLR & lens where I can live with for at least 5 years or more. From my style of shooting, I figure I will need at least 4 lens to cover all the range. I do shoot a lot of interior, landscape, travel & outdoor activities, then portrait & macro.

Here are 3 choices of the sets I have been thinking and can't make up my mind.

I recently bought a 20D system for travel use and initially bought the following:

10-22, 17-40L, 50/2.5 macro, 70-300DO \

However, I found that the hole in 40-70 wasn't ideally filled by the 50/2.5 so added a 24-70/2.8L instead.

Now, I find myself using the 10-22, 24-70L, 70-300DO almost exclusively. The 17-40L is a better lens but I find that when I want to go wide that the 10-22 is just more convenient. It gets left behind when I travel light but used when I can afford the extra weight. I'm using DXO Optics Pro 3.0 to process the 10-22 files and these really improve if you apply this type of lens post-processing.

Why not buy a good general purpose lens like the 24-70 and shoot with it for a while. See how often you feel you need wider, how often you need more speed, how often you need more reach for portraits etc

Then once you can understand your shooting style and needs you can make an informed decision rather than asking a bunch of folks on an internet forum who may have totally different needs that you.

For example, you may find you only use the 70-200 at 200mm nearly every shot, or that even with f2.8 its too slow to stop action and you could instead consider the 135 f2 which is an excellent lens.

There really arent any bad lenses produced today and they produce such a wide range because they all have different strengths for different peoples needs and situations.

I have a 10-22, 15mm fisheye, 17-40, 17-85, and 24-70 for example and all those lens have different strengths depending on what my assignments and travel needs are.

Remember lenses are tools and you should tailor your lens choice to the demands your shooting needs place upon you. You shouldnt be limited in what you shoot or feel you have to shoot because of what lenses you bought